Clueless applying to MD/Ph.D (possibly)

[TriagePreMed]

---

Members do not see this ad.

...

 

[miz]

Typically people try for 80:20 rather than 50:50- which is not to say you can't do it, only that you'll meet a lot of profs while interviewing who will tell you you can't. Have you considered doing research as an MD? Plus, what kind of research do you want to do eventually, clinical or basic or translational? If clinical or even translational you might find it easier to do an MD.
I'm not going to speculate on your chances because frankly I have no idea. But your stats don't sound so bad to me, although more research would be better. Have you taken the MCAT?

 

[StIGMA]

You're stats are weak, your research experiences appear weak, you don't have an MCAT score, and you have no clear understanding why you intend to do an MD/PhD. What do you want us to tell you?

If you intend to do purely basic science research (eg: using model organisms, mice, cells, materials...) as the foundation of your career, then consider the MD/PhD. You will not finish residency until you are in your early 40's. If you do not plan to spend 75-80% of your time (eg: 40 weeks a year or 4 days a week) doing purely research, do not do pursue an MD/PhD.

If you are not gushing with love for basic science research, pursue the MD. You can do all the neuroscience you like with an MD, with most MD researchers pursuing clinical research. Plenty of MD's do translational (eg: working out the kinks in basic work to bring to patient benefit) and basic science work.

Figure out what you want. Talk to MD's, PhD's, and MD/PhD's. Talk to residents. For trying to make a decision that will consume the next 10+ years of your life, you appear to have done surprisingly little research into what medical research comprises, based on your response to Miz.

 

[K31]

As others have said, there's nothing you can do as a MD/PhD that you can't as a MD. You need to be very committed to MD/PhD before you start this path.

The ideal is of a graduate who sees patients a minority of the time and spends most of the time dong research in a clinically relevant area--not that everyone does, but it is what programs expect to hear from their applicants. You need to show, particularly through your research and preferably through extensive interaction with physician-scientists as well, that you know what such a career entails.

You already have several strikes against you with weak research experiences and most (all?) your science courses being from a community college. Being a non-trad is going to hurt you as well--they are very unusual in MD/PhD programs, and programs have had problems with them changing their mind after considering the full length of the program. You need to be very certain going into this.

 

[SBR249]

I will also say that one needs to also look at things from the perspective of an MD/PhD program. These programs (and the taxpayers if it's an MSTP) are investing something like 300-400K per student over the duration of the entire program. That's not something that they take lightly, especially for non-trad applicants. A good question to ask yourself, in addition to why you want to do this, is why a program would want to offer you a spot knowing that you'll be 36-37 when you graduate and probably mid-40s when you are done training and are entering what should be the most productive period of your career.

If you can convincingly answer those two questions then you should consider an MD/PhD. If not, then you may want to prioritize and consider either MD or PhD.

 

[SBR249]

I can't go back in time and know that I would like to pursue a path like this. If I could, I would. I can only accomplish things from the age I have. I understand that being 28 doesn't sound too sweet, but I have no say on this matter. Also, nobody knows when we'll die. For all you know you're training a 22 year old that will die at 35, and i could be someone to work until my 70's or 80's.

Relax, I'm not trying to imply anything about what you should be like right now. I'm saying that it helps to think from the perspective of the program. I know it helped me tremendously, not only in understanding where the adcoms are coming from, but also to identify shortcomings in my application and how I should go about addressing them. It's not a criticism it's just another tool to assess yourself.

You can't change your age or the past, that's a fact. But the hard truth is that the adcoms are human too and these issues will surface, if not at your interviews, then when they review your application. If you don't prepare yourself to address them head on, then it could be detrimental to your chances.

Thank you. I agree with you that I must be fully on-board and understand what it means to become an MD/Ph.D before hitting that "submit" button on my application. Comments like yours help me see what things I should focus on learning before applying to this path: more physician-scientist interaction + stronger research.

I realize many non-trads must drop out of MD/Ph.D and pursue one path only, but I can't do more than say I won't be that person. I'm not taking applying to MD/Ph.D lightly.

I do have a few small beefs about the statements above, whether or not it's your original intent. You seem to have already made up your mind about MD/PhD and yet have not fully explored this career path. The way you've presented your path to MD/PhD, some may think that you made up your mind first without knowing all the details and then just checked the boxes to satisfy the adcoms. Even though that may not be how it is for you, it's probably not the way you want to come across in your application or interviews.

In addition, I disagree with you not being able to do more than say that you won't drop out. There are a variety of ways you can communicate that than just by saying it. It shows through shadowing and interacting with physician-scientists. It shows through extensive or even shorter but relevant research experiences. For non-trads, it may show through having a clear goal or picture of what you want to do, where you want to go, and exactly how long you would like to take to get there and the knowledge that you may not have the opportunity or time to explore around like younger students do. It could also show through having carefully thought out plans regarding situations such as how you would handle family life, kids, etc as a student.

It may not be enough to say that you won't drop out. But if you show that you've given it serious thought and can come up with plans for at least the normal, foreseeable challenges, then it decreases the chances of you dropping out to the adcoms and shows that you're committed.

 

[Neuronix]

I'm a 28 year old URM thinking about applying to MD/Ph.D. Programs. My first stint in college was with a social sciences degree. I received a lousy GPA (2.7) and had no research at all. I went back to school at a community college and brought my cGPA to a 3.1 and a my sGPA to a 3.6/3.7. I spent a summer doing research in entomology at Berkeley, and a year and a half at my CC (bio). This summer I have another research opportunity lined up at a local 4-year.

Your age isn't my primary concern. You have a lousy GPA and your science/pre-med requirements are all done at community college. This is not a strong application for MD programs, let alone MD/PhD. The way to make up for past mistakes would be to 4.0 in a post-bacc at a 4 year university. It seems a little late for that. MD/DO would be more realistic IMO.

 

[PfNO22]

Also, nobody knows when we'll die. For all you know you're training a 22 year old that will die at 35, and i could be someone to work until my 70's or 80's.

Carpe diem!

Why even do an MD/PhD? Nobody wants to spend the last ten years of their life in PhD!?

 

[K31]

One question: Is applying MD/Ph.D going to hurt me in any way? My understanding is that even if rejected my application is also evaluated for MD-only at the time. I understand that my chances are low to none, but if it won't affect me to apply MD/Ph.D, might as well try out for the "dream" scenario.

Yes, it could hurt you for MD admissions. MD/PhD programs often say that if they decide not to interview or accept you that you will be or can request to be evaluated separately by the MD program, but it rarely works out that smoothly. At the least, your application will be delayed as the MD/PhD program evaluates you. At some programs, the applicants are never even interviewed by the MD adcom if they interview for MD/PhD, making it nearly impossible for them to be evaluated for MD-only if rejected for MD/PhD.

If you do end up applying MD/PhD, I'd strongly encourage you to apply MD or DO at a number of schools where you don't apply MD/PhD.

 

[QofQuimica]

Your age isn't my primary concern. You have a lousy GPA and your science/pre-med requirements are all done at community college. This is not a strong application for MD programs, let alone MD/PhD. The way to make up for past mistakes would be to 4.0 in a post-bacc at a 4 year university. It seems a little late for that. MD/DO would be more realistic IMO.

Agree with all of this, and Triage, I would add that you've done nothing to specifically show commitment to a neuroscience research career. Entomology is cool, but if you're going to try to play yourself off as a future basic neuroscientist, a lack of neuroscience experience to back up what you say makes you come across as someone who hasn't really thought this thing through. Also, as the others have said, if you're looking for more of a 50-50 split and/or a clinical type of research career, you would be better off doing straight MD/DO or maybe an MD/MS program. There are multiple med schools that offer an MS in clinical research. You might want to consider that option if you haven't already.

 

[Silverfalcon]

For the practicality, apply to MD/DO schools, get in (let's face it - this feat alone isn't a walk in the park), and do some research while you are in medical school.

 

[SBR249]

There are also a lot of formal and informal programs that will give you at least a year of full time research during or immediately after medical school.

- Cleveland Clinic (5 year program, ~32/class, full tuition scholarships for all)
- Pittsburgh CSTP (dual MD/MS in clinical research, full funded for research year + 1 year of full/partial med school scholarship)
- Duke (3 year med curriculum, 1 year of research or other pursuits before 4th year)
- Many medical schools incorporate some research time into their curriculum like Mayo, Yale, Stanford, etc or encourage students to take an extra year and be funded by intra-school mechanisms such as Case Western.

There are also outside grants that give you a year of research in med school such as NIH CRTP, HHMI at Janelia Farm, Doris Duke CRF, etc.

In addition, institutions such as the NIH, FDA, etc may have predoctoral fellowships like funded through mechanisms such as IRTA, CRTA, etc that may pay you for research if you can get a leave of absence from med school for a year or so.

And then there are also research opportunities in specialized residency or fellowship programs.

So even without doing an MSTP, there are plenty of opportunities to do research as an MD.

 

[24thGrade]

As others have said, really any MD-PhD program is going to be a long shot. The only way real way to immediately work your way closer is to kill the MCAT which unfortunately isn't simply a matter of memorizing a lot and is to a good extent determined by whether you are good at taking tests which may or may not be the case for you. You probably have an idea of this from what you got on your SAT compared to others (yeah... the correlation isn't great, but if you did horrible on the SAT odds are you're not going to be in the 90th percentile on the MCAT). I understand you are in a hard situation, but another reality you have to face is that you'll be competing with people who's mommy and daddy won't blink to dump $1500+ on a prep course and other stuff that does tend to get results.

Your negatives:
GPA from your 4 year
CC premed classes
Age- although it isn't terribly uncommon to see people enter at ~26
Research at your college is probablygoing to be very uninteresting to adcoms and interviewers
Research in bio at your CC probably won't be up to the level expected from admissions either

Your positives
Great grades at CC
URM status- this may actually help a lot

Again, the only thing left is your MCAT. And while no one will tell you to get a 33+ on it is impossible, your previous academic record doesn't suggest you will. You still have a clean slate here though.

As someone else suggested, if you really want the MD, I think it would be best to apply MD-only and do a few summers of research- many schools will have funds to pay for you to fit in a year of research somewhere in the middle of med school. If this doesn't sound appealing to you, the MD may not be worth it and you may want to just apply to just PhD programs which may be more reachable. Additionally, keep in mind if you apply MD only you will still need to do well on your MCAT (~28+ish) to help compensate for the past academic history. As stated above, the URM status will help substantially, but in MD-PhD admissions I really do not think it will in any way compensate for a lack of basic science research credentials.

Sorry if this sounds harsh. I'm just trying to give you my honest opinion which is probably worth nothing. Best of luck in whatever you choose to do!

 

[SBR249]

If either the straight MD or the PHD route is under consideration, it may be worth it also to take the GRE in addition to the MCAT. That way you can keep your options open down the road.

 

[miz]

OP, if you are interested in the postbac IRTA/CRTA fellowship, please feel free to PM me and I can tell you about my experience there. The fellowship is one or two years postbac at the NIH and can add substantially to your research experience, provided you are able to find a mentor to sponsor you. If you are serious about an MD-PhD, it might be a strong option, although you might be better off in a Master degree program so you can improve your GPA as well.